How have courts treated the Suspension Clause in the context of the Applicant's second petition?

MultiRegion, United States of America

The following excerpt is from Warren v. Garvin, 219 F.3d 111 (2nd Cir. 1999):

1. Although we refer to Warren's February 22, 1999 petition as his "second petition," we do not mean that it was a "second or successive petition" as used, for example, in 28 U.S.C. 2244, because his earlier April 21, 1997 petition was dismissed without prejudice. See Slack v. McDaniel, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 1604-05 (2000).

1. Although we refer to Warren's February 22, 1999 petition as his "second petition," we do not mean that it was a "second or successive petition" as used, for example, in 28 U.S.C. 2244, because his earlier April 21, 1997 petition was dismissed without prejudice. See Slack v. McDaniel, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 1604-05 (2000).

2. Warren did not raise the Suspension Clause issue in his appellate brief. Although he addressed the issue during oral argument in response to a question from the panel, "[i]ssues not sufficiently argued in the briefs are considered waived and normally will not be addressed on appeal." Norton v. Sam's Club, 145 F.3d 114, 117 (2d Cir. 1998). In any case, Warren cannot plausibly claim that he was unreasonably burdened here, inasmuch as he had years to file his federal petition, he was afforded a reasonable time after the enactment of AEDPA to file, and he has given no satisfactory explanation as to why he was unable to file his petition on time. See Rodriguez, 990 F.Supp. at 283.

2. Warren did not raise the Suspension Clause issue in his appellate brief. Although he addressed the issue during oral argument in response to a question from the panel, "[i]ssues not sufficiently argued in the briefs are considered waived and normally will not be addressed on appeal." Norton v. Sam's Club, 145 F.3d 114, 117 (2d Cir. 1998). In any case, Warren cannot plausibly claim that he was unreasonably burdened here, inasmuch as he had years to file his federal petition, he was afforded a reasonable time after the enactment of AEDPA to file, and he has given no satisfactory explanation as to why he was unable to file his petition on time. See Rodriguez, 990 F.Supp. at 283.

Other Questions


Is a second or successive habeas petition filed in a federal district or federal court a "second or successive" application? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
When a final judgment from one district court is registered with another district court pursuant to Section 1963, is it treated like a judgment from the other district court? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
If an applicant succeeds in his res judicata application, does the application have grounds to stay the application? (Canada (Federal), Canada)
How have the courts treated the evidence in defence of the case of the Attorney General's defence in the context of the Court of Appeal? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
How have courts treated a habeas corpus petition in the district courts? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
Does a dismissal of a second habeas petition require the petitioner to file a second petition? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
What are the limits on the amount of time that a court can extend an application to extend the application for an extension of the application? (Canada (Federal), Canada)
Does the fact that a state appellate court has been granted a hearing on an application for habeas corpus relief at the Superior Court of Appeal invalidate the application? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
If a motion is brought before the Superior Court of Justice in the absence of a motion before the Court of Appeal, and the motion has been adjourned for a second time, is there an instance where this court should take jurisdiction? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
How has the court treated cross-examination in the context of sexual assault? (MultiRegion, United States of America)
X



Alexi white


"The most advanced legal research software ever built."

Trusted by top litigators from across North America.